Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 19
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19, § 766 (2026)

Relief

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(REPEALED)
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1979, c. 578, §§5,7 (NEW). PL 1979, c. 677, §§12,18 (AMD). PL 1981, c. 420, §§7-10 (AMD). PL 1985, c. 495, §14 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 834, §B12 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 862, §§17,18 (AMD). PL 1991, c. 760, §§10,11 (AMD). PL 1993, c. 475, §10 (AMD). PL 1995, c. 125, §1 (AMD). PL 1995, c. 405, §15 (AMD). PL 1995, c. 650, §15 (AMD). PL 1995, c. 694, §B1 (RP). PL 1995, c. 694, §E2 (AFF).
The Revisor's Office cannot provide legal advice or interpretation of Maine law to the public.
If you need legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1990–1997 · leading case: Henriksen v. Cameron, 622 A.2d 1135 (Me. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Henriksen v. Cameron, 622 A.2d 1135 (Me. 1993). · cites it 2× “19 M.R.S.A. § 766 (1981 & Supp.1992). Violation of a protective order or consent agreement constitutes a Class D crime.”
Cooke v. Naylor, 573 A.2d 376 (Me. 1990). · cites it 2× “19 M.R.S.A. § 766(1). The order is historically an equitable remedy, very similar to an injunction, see In re Shane T, 544 A.”
Sordyl v. Sordyl, 1997 ME 87 (Me. 1997). “) pursuant to 19 M.R.S.A. § 766 (1981 & Supp.1996). Defendant seeks to challenge an evidentiary ruling made by the District Court in finding “abuse” within the meaning of 19 M.”
State v. Haley, 629 A.2d 605 (Me. 1993). · cites it 2× “See 19 M.R.S.A. § 766 (1981 & Supp.1992). The order prohibited Haley from “threatening, assaulting, molesting, attacking, harassing or otherwise abusing” Katherine.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19, § 766(1) — 1 case
Cooke v. Naylor, 573 A.2d 376 (Me. 1990). “19 M.R.S.A. § 766(1). The order is historically an equitable remedy, very similar to an injunction, see In re Shane T, 544 A.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19, § 766(2) — 1 case
Cooke v. Naylor, 573 A.2d 376 (Me. 1990). “19 M.R.S.A. § 766(1). The order is historically an equitable remedy, very similar to an injunction, see In re Shane T, 544 A.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.